Rules that make no sense

[voiceoflg]

On another thread about OPI and DPI, asdf stated:

Originally Posted by asdf

One of many that make absolutely no sense.

Not calling him out specifically, I am just curious. What FED rule(s) do you all find that makes absolutely no sense? And how would you change it?

[Rich]

I'm not sure it makes no sense, but I've been long opposed to offensive fouls (such as holding) being spot fouls behind the line of scrimmage.

1/10 becomes 1/27 and there's the end of the series for most teams.

I think the NCAA gets this one right. The foul is 10 yards, no more.

I also think the logic behind "if we're not penalizing a LOD on OPI we can't give an AFD on DPI" is tortured, at best. The NCAA/NFL have never had an issue with it, for example. It's not like there weren't examples of other codes, in other words, and the NFHS was breaking new ground.

I'd also eliminate non-PF, non-flagrant, non-USC fouls on scoring plays against the defense. No reason we should penalize 15 on the kickoff for DPI when there's a TD scored on the play. This is one that, to me, makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

I'd also put an AFD in for all PFs, but that's just something on my wish list.

[whitehat]

I'm with you Rich, on all points!

[bisonlj]

I agree with Rich as well. Penalty enforcement for fouls against the defense when the run ends behind the LOS should be enforced at the previous spot as well. Case in point, QB drops back to pass and wants to throw to an eligible receiver downfield but he's held. The QB gets sacked for a 10-yard loss. Penalty enforcement for a running play is from the end of the run so this brings the ball back to the previous spot AFTER enforcement. It would be more equitable to enforce that from the previous. It's not a major issue because it doesn't happen often.

[HLin NC]

One that was changed this year was the towel rule. Why we had to be the towel police, I'll never know. I understand streamers and tiger tails and all the stupid juvenile "look at me" crap.

However they didn't take it far enough- I understand no ball or penalty flag colors but why if 3 guys have white and 3 guys have black towels does it really matter?

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

I agree with Rich as well. Penalty enforcement for fouls against the defense when the run ends behind the LOS should be enforced at the previous spot as well. Case in point, QB drops back to pass and wants to throw to an eligible receiver downfield but he's held. The QB gets sacked for a 10-yard loss. Penalty enforcement for a running play is from the end of the run so this brings the ball back to the previous spot AFTER enforcement. It would be more equitable to enforce that from the previous.

True, but that would be better dealt with by having as a separate foul (and enforcement) illegal use of hands vs. an eligible receiver while a legal forward pass to him is possible, irrespective of whether the play ends as a running play. In other words, this should be an exception to 3-and-1, while the general case of fouls by the defense should keep that enforcement.

For rules that make no sense, you don't have to look farther than another thread going on now, where one team puts the ball behind the opposing goal line and the opposing team gains possession and fouls there. It "makes sense" in that a fairly simple application of rules produces a safety, but it doesn't make sense in the overall conception of the touchback/safety distinction.

[Rich]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

I agree with Rich as well. Penalty enforcement for fouls against the defense when the run ends behind the LOS should be enforced at the previous spot as well. Case in point, QB drops back to pass and wants to throw to an eligible receiver downfield but he's held. The QB gets sacked for a 10-yard loss. Penalty enforcement for a running play is from the end of the run so this brings the ball back to the previous spot AFTER enforcement. It would be more equitable to enforce that from the previous. It's not a major issue because it doesn't happen often.

You just hit on one I forgot.

A12 drops back to pass. He's tackled 10 yards behind the LOS by his face mask.

That should be enforced from the previous spot, NOT from the spot where A12 was illegally tackled.

[Robert Goodman]

Originally Posted by Rich

A12 drops back to pass. He's tackled 10 yards behind the LOS by his face mask.

That should be enforced from the previous spot, NOT from the spot where A12 was illegally tackled.

Why?

If instead A12 had run 10 yards downfield and fouled there, would you want the penalty on A enforced from the previous spot? Why wipe out the progress of the play up to the time and place of the foul?

[Welpe]

Originally Posted by Rich

You just hit on one I forgot.

A12 drops back to pass. He's tackled 10 yards behind the LOS by his face mask.

That should be enforced from the previous spot, NOT from the spot where A12 was illegally tackled.

Unless A12 fumbles, then it is from the previous spot...which is crazy.

[BktBallRef]

Originally Posted by bisonlj

I agree with Rich as well. Penalty enforcement for fouls against the defense when the run ends behind the LOS should be enforced at the previous spot as well. Case in point, QB drops back to pass and wants to throw to an eligible receiver downfield but he's held. The QB gets sacked for a 10-yard loss. Penalty enforcement for a running play is from the end of the run so this brings the ball back to the previous spot AFTER enforcement. It would be more equitable to enforce that from the previous. It's not a major issue because it doesn't happen often.

We can always offer plays to make our point. For example,

QB A12 is scrambling for his life. 15 yards behind the LOS, B78 is about to sack A12 when he's literally tackled by A56, enabling A12 to throw the ball away. If the rule was written as Rich suggested, we enforce the holding from the previous spot. Team A saves 5 yards on the play by committing the foul as well as getting the opportunity to replay the down.

Is that more equitable? No.

[bisonlj]

Originally Posted by BktBallRef

We can always offer plays to make our point. For example,

QB A12 is scrambling for his life. 15 yards behind the LOS, B78 is about to sack A12 when he's literally tackled by A56, enabling A12 to throw the ball away. If the rule was written as Rich suggested, we enforce the holding from the previous spot. Team A saves 5 yards on the play by committing the foul as well as getting the opportunity to replay the down.

Is that more equitable? No.

It's never going to be 100% perfect but there are going to be more circumstances where it's more equitable to penalize from the previous spot than the spot of the foul for fouls behind the NZ and when runs end behind the NZ. I work both codes and much prefer the NCAA code.